Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment This ruling won't fix anything (Score 5, Insightful) 178

Simply keeping the data in the EU won't fix anything so long as that data is still being held by US controlled entities, as those entities will still be forced to hand over the data regardless of where it is (lets face it, Microsofts battle against that particular issue is destined to fail).

The only real way this is going to be solved is to force all EU data to be stored by entities that are not owned or controlled by a non-EU entity. Which means Amazon SaRL will be unconnected to and effectively competing against each other.

Comment Re:This was not a screw-up (Score 1) 389

We do not have a deep submergence communication system, only a system which requires the patrol subs to be at a given depth to be able to receive a communication at a set time during their patrol.

Without a method to contact the subs at depth, we have no ability to authorise a launch on demand so instead we use a beacon system - if the sub doesnt detect a transmission at the predetermined time, and they also dont detect several other 24/7 transmissions, then the Captain opens a letter the PM has issued the Royal Navy, and follows the instructions in that letter.

Comment Re:This was not a screw-up (Score 3, Informative) 389

The system the Royal Navy uses to come to a decision as to whether to launch or not is purely cost based - our nuclear deterrent launch authority is independent to that of the US, so we cant use their infrastructure to issue launch authority as that may be denied to us on occasion. Since replacing that infrastructure is a big and costly venture, unjustifiable for the two submarines that are on armed patrol, we use a simpler system.

As we havent had an issue yet, I'd say its perfectly adequate...

Comment Re:What about the rights of those injured by firea (Score 1) 1148

Its interesting that in the US Constitution, the right to bear arms came before the right for black people to not be treated as property. There's something fundamentally wrong with that, and yet the US Constitution is upheld as something the world should admire and strive to work toward...

Comment Re:Uber is as safe as taxis (Score 1) 469

You keep using that word in a manner which makes me think you don't understand its meaning.

And you seem to have also deliberately misunderstood my post - but then again, going by the use of that word in the way you have, I don't think you really care for reality.

Comment Re:Uber is as safe as taxis (Score 1) 469

And yet we still don't have a reason why we are seeing Uber cars operating unlicensed in the UK....

They may be the best thing since sliced bread, that doesn't mean they can operate unlicensed - especially as the license costs are no barrier to entry here.

Comment Re:Uber is as safe as taxis (Score 5, Insightful) 469

The taxi medallion issue comes up frequently here on Slashdot, especially in support of Uber - except many countries dont have medallions or the costs associated with them. Here in the UK, to become a licensed taxi in my local area, it will cost you less than £3000 in fees every four years - wheres the excuse for Uber to be operating unlicensed in the same location?

Comment Re:So you remove their only way to make a living? (Score 4, Informative) 166

So you remove their only way to make a living?

They should be making their living legally, not illegally - the same would happen in any other circumstance where you are earning money through illegal means...

Comment Re:US got bored forcing their laws on other countr (Score 1) 162

We europeans lough our asses off about such stupidity.

Really? Try going abroad to have sex with underage children in a country where that is legal.

That sort of thing is prosecuted in the EU, regardless of it being legal in the foreign jurisdiction. Its also prosecuted in the US as well.

Comment Re:US got bored forcing their laws on other countr (Score 1) 162

Your argumentation is completely wrong. An EU company is not required to follow any special EU laws for its operations in the US, only US laws apply (except for accounting and other stuff, which are usually fixed via ownership constructions where one company owns another one).

Uh, completely and utterly wrong - EU companies are still required to follow EU law when operating in other countries.

Take for example bribery and financial conduct laws - what may be legal in the foreign jurisdiction isn't necessarily legal in their home countries jurisdiction, and there have been examples of EU companies being investigated and prosecuted within the EU for their actions in non-EU countries.

However the USA tries to force american companies that operate in the EU to follow not only EU law, which is a no brainer, but also US law, which is idiotic.

If they dont want to follow the law of the country that they are incorporated in, they can move their HQ elsewhere in the world. Simple as that.

What good is a ticket to the good life, if you can't find the entrance?